|
|
 |
| |
|
 |
BRITISH HORSERACING AUTHORITY ANTI-DOPING AND MEDICATION CONTROL;
British Horseracing generates its integrity and public acceptance from the concept of fair and safe racing. The best horse should win fairly and squarely, and safely, having competed in compliance with the Rules of Racing. To be valid and meaningful, competition results must be achieved on a level playing field. Doping and the inappropriate use of normal medications present a serious threat to the integrity and reputation of our sport, because they give competitors an unfair advantage and threaten the welfare of horses.
Therefore, as the regulator of British Horseracing, the Authority operates a robust system of zero tolerance to doping. We do, however, recognise that an overwhelming majority of positive samples result from inadvertent failures in medication control whilst caring for a horse in training. We therefore ensure that our system of stringent regulation concerning anti-doping and medication control recognises the need for medication at a permitted concentration and incorporates the essential features of education and prevention. To provide participants with the information on what happens and their responsibilities in the case of a possible positive drug test further information is available on the website which includes questions and answers.
INTRODUCTION AND CHANGES TO PROCEDURE;
In order to ensure that the highest standards are maintained in anti-doping and medication control policies and procedures, the BHA's testing and medication policies have recently been reviewed by the an independent external review process. This review recommended making certain alterations to the current anti-doping and medication control sampling procedures.
For example, until recently the procedure for the Counter Analysis of a sample reported by the HFL was overseen by the Counter Analysis Advisory Committee (CAAC). CAAC's role was to act as the independent reviewer of the B-Sample testing, and confirm that procedure had been followed correctly. The CAAC was established when The Jockey Club was significantly involved in the regulation of racing and owned the racing laboratory. However, as Racing is now under the control of an Independent Authority it is not necessary to have an Independent Committee advising on the Counter Analysis procedure. The testing laboratory is now a separate commercial business and consists of internationally recognised and independently audited quality control systems providing the impartial referee function previously provided by the CAAC. These commercial and regulatory advancements do now enable the Authority to provide a sampling procedure system which ensures superior levels of integrity and efficiency. Therefore from 1st January 2012 Counter Analysis will no longer include the involvement of the CAAC.
Furthermore, these changes will ensure that the Authority's policies and procedures are aligned with those of other sports, remain robust, and make full use of advances in science and laboratory systems whilst offering best value to the sport. You will find on this website answers to potential questions regarding the Authority's policies and procedures of anti-doping and medication control in the following specific areas:
A. ANTI-DOPING AND MEDICATION CONTROL
1. What is the definition of a Prohibited Substance in horseracing?
• A prohibited substance is any substance capable at any time of causing an action or effect, or both an action and effect, within one or more of the mammalian body systems as listed on our website;
• Please refer to the Medication Control "Prohibited Substances" Section for further information on the broad definition of a prohibited substance according to the Rules of Racing.
2. Where exactly are the anti-doping and medication control rules located?
• The Rules on anti-doping procedures can be found on our Rules website Trainer Manual (C) Part 4 Prohibited Substances;
3. What is the rationale behind prohibiting substances in horseracing?
• As set out in Schedule (C) 6-certain categories of substances are prohibited in horseracing, as these substances may have a performance altering effect on horses. The use of such substances violates the principle of fair competition and prevents safe racing standards being maintained for horse and jockey. Furthermore, use of such substances may have negative health effects, exposing horses to unnecessary health risks.
• Certain prohibited substances are absolutely prohibited at any concentration whilst others are prohibited at clinically significant levels and controlled by screening levels which are linked to detection times;
• However some endogenous (normally found in the body) substances are regarded as "threshold substances" and are permitted at certain concentrations in the mammalian body systems of the horse, because they are below a level when they have an effect.
4. What is the concept of strict liability?
• Trainers should familiarise themselves with the content and categories on the prohibited list as the principle of strict liability applies i.e. if a laboratory reports that a prohibited substance has been found in a blood or urine sample, that is an absolute finding. This means that each Trainer is strictly liable in respect of any substances found in a sample taken from one of their horses. Therefore it is irrelevant whether the Person unintentionally or intentionally administered a Prohibited Substance. A breach of the Rules will still have occurred. A Trainer will not be excused following a positive sample except in instances where the Authority invalidates the result of the analysis.
5. In what circumstances would the result of an analysis be invalidated?
• This power to invalidate a result is governed by Schedule (C)52 and The Authority may declines to issue charges if the Trainer of the horse satisfies the Authority that: there was a material departure from the procedures relating to taking the sample and analysis of the same or the opinion expressed by the Laboratory as to the nature of the substance is incorrect.
6. How does the Authority control medication and doping, what are the penalties?
• Please refer to the medication control and doping control questions and answers section of the BHA website for details regarding this process;
• Penalties for breaches of the Rules relating to anti-doping and medication control are located on the BHA website, in the Guide to Procedures and Penalties 2011, section 6.
B. POSITIVE RESULTS MANAGEMENT
7. What is the difference between a screening test and an "A" Sample and "B" Sample test?
• Under the current system, a horse's sample is split in two portions. The A and B samples are sealed in front of the Trainer or their representative and then transported to the testing laboratory. The A sample is tested initially by a screening process, and if an unusual screening finding is recorded, then a separate primary confirmation takes place to confirm that finding.
• If the positive is confirmed then the Trainer is notified. The Trainer has 3 working days to inform the Authority in writing whether or not they wish to have the B sample analysed ("Counter Analysis"). If no such acceptance is received then counter analysis will proceed autonomously.
• If no such acceptance is received then counter analysis will proceed as normal.
8. Are the BHA's medication control and anti-doping processes carried out by approved laboratories?
• The BHA's drug surveillance system is provided by the HFL Sport Science, Newmarket, a division of LGC.
• LGC is an international leader in laboratory services, measurement standards, reference materials and proficiency testing marketplaces and one of the world's largest independent analytical and forensic companies.
• Under a contract with the British Government, LGC performs the role of the Government Chemist, the statutory arbiter of analytical determinations as defined in a number of UK Acts of Parliament. Please see website for more details in relation to LGC.
9. What quality control policies are implemented by HFL?
• HFL is subject to a number of international recognised quality control schemes, which includes independent audits which ensure a robust and specific system of quality management. The requirement to use these schemes is part of the Authority's contract with HFL.
• In addition to the quality assured by these schemes the Authority may on occasion request oversight of confirmation procedures drawing on the experience of LGC's Government Chemist role, and a report would be provided that would be available to the Authority.
10. How do I know that rigorous sampling methods are implemented within the sampling process?
• The Authority follows written standards of procedure to collect and secure samples and ensure the chain of custody to the laboratory is maintained.
• The Authority's contract with HFL contains stringent provisions in relation to all operating procedures of sample management and analysis.
11. As a Trainer can I witness the sampling procedure?
• You may witness the sampling procedure, either in person or by a representative authorised to enter the racecourse stable yard. You or your representative will be expected to observe: i) the division and transfer of the Sample into the A and B forensic bottles and ii) the sealing and labeling, with the appropriate coded label, of the forensic bottles, and sign to record this.
• If you choose not to witness these procedures, you or your representative are expected to sign a declaration to that effect.
12. As a Trainer– what are the requirements should I wish to apply for an independent scientific witness to witness the sampling process once my horse tests positive for a prohibited substance?
• Should you request a scientific witness certain criteria must be met: the individual must be a Member or Fellow of the Association of Official Racing Chemists;
(i) they should understand on behalf of the Trainer or Owner the quality system in place at the laboratory;
(ii) they should observe on behalf of the Trainer or Owner the analysis process on the particular sample in the context of this quality system;
(iii) they can ask questions to understand questions (i)/(ii) above;
(iv) the witness must be acceptable to the connections of the horse, the counter analysis laboratory, and the Authority.
Please note it may take time to locate a scientific witness and there is already a list of available experts for counter analysis in France and England which facilitates this process. The cost of hiring an independent witness is borne by the Trainer/Owner.
Please contact the Authority for information in relation to scientific witnesses- compliance@britishhorseracing.com
13. What if for genuine medical reasons my horse requires a drug treatment and I have acted in accordance with the recommended Detection Times?
• Although no horse should run in Great Britain whilst under the effects of medication or have any substance present in its system that can affect its performance, the Authority recognises the need for medication in training to ensure treatment of disease and injury and that appropriate and controlled medication is good for horse welfare;
• Taking into account this need for medication whilst adhering to recommended detection times, a Trainer can be assured that the laboratory are contractually bound not to look below levels in a screening finding which no longer has a clinical effect unless the screening finding present/ exceeds a screening limit or meets the criteria for a particular substance to be detected;
• It is critical that Trainers/Owners consult their Veterinary Surgeon at all times when dispensing appropriate drug treatments to prevent substances exceeding these screening limits, please refer to medication control part of website for more information;
• Although the Authority issues guidance to help avoid medication control breaches, however the principle of strict liability remains absolute;
• Measures taken to avoid medication control breaches can be taken into account as mitigating factors by the Authority's Disciplinary Panel.
14. If the results are negative – do I receive the results of the analysis?
No. If the results are negative, unless otherwise directed by the Authority, by virtue of the services agreement provisions, HFL shall destroy negative samples no sooner than seven business days following delivery of a negative report to the Authority. To notify each person subject to the sampling procedure be an inefficient allocation of resources.
15. If the results are positive – when do I receive a notification of the results of the analysis?
HFL retains positive samples and seeks authorisation from the Authority to perform Confirmatory Analysis. HFL will complete Confirmatory Analysis and communicate the result within 7 business days to the Authority. who will in turn communicate this information to the relevant Trainer/ Owner as soon as is practicable.
16. What are my options once I receive notification of the positive findings in the sample?
• If a positive sample result is received from HFL, the first step is that the Trainer will be contacted by Integrity Services and notified of the positive finding;
• Once notified the name of the horse and the substance are not disclosed at this stage and a visit will be arranged to investigate the reason for the prohibited substance at the earliest opportunity;
• In all cases of unusual screening findings the Trainer will receive the results of ensuing positives as soon as possible and as an absolute priority;
• When interviewed the Trainer will receive a copy of the Veterinary Officer's Report completed when the sample was taken, a copy of the Certificate of Analysis from the Horseracing Forensic Laboratory and a copy of Rule (C)58 and Schedules (C)7 and (C)10. Schedule (C)10 gives the Trainer and/or Owner the opportunity to accept the findings of the A sample and inform the Authority in writing within 3 working days that they do not wish counter analysis of the B Sample to take place. If no such acceptance is received then counter analysis will proceed.
17. What penalties can apply if I am ultimately found to have committed a breach of the Rules?
• The Disciplinary Panel will impose a financial penalty on the Trainer;
• The Disciplinary Panel may withdraw or suspend the Trainer's licence; and
• The Disciplinary Panel may also order a contribution to costs if it is satisfied that the result of the 'A Sample' should have been accepted having regard to the knowledge of and information available to the Trainer/Owner concerned at the time;
• If the substance was not recorded in the medication records required by Rule (C) 13, the Disciplinary Panel- may impose an additional penalty on the Trainer.
• When deciding the appropriate penalty the Panel may take into account mitigating and aggravating factors to either reduce or increase the sanction imposed.
• The Horse will also be subject to disqualification in the race already run when the sample taken post-race tests positive for a prohibited substance.
18. Can my horse race once a positive finding has been confirmed?
• Yes, a horse is entitled to race once a positive has been confirmed subject to meeting the requirements outlined in Schedule (B) 2 of the Rules of Racing;
• However, if advised by the Equine Science and Welfare BHA that the horse still has significant amounts of the substance in its system, we would advise the horse not to run in order to prevent further positive;
19. What happens if my horse is placed in a race where the winner is found to have breached Rule (C) 53?
• By virtue of Rule (A) 74.2 Ground 3 of the Rules, the Authority will at Inquiry stage disqualify the horse and would then alter the finishing position of the other horses placed in the race e.g. if the disqualified horse finishes first, the horse that finishes second would then be placed first and so on;
• The Authority may also consider if subsequent races which the horse is entered are affected as a result of this positive finding;
• You will automatically receive your prize money 15 days after the race even in circumstances where your horse is placed in a race where another horse has breached Rule (C) 53;
• Prize money will also be updated and reapportioned to the other placed horses once the Inquiry is completed and the horse has been disqualified;
C. THE CHANGE OF THE COUNTER ANALYSIS/ "B SAMPLE ANALYSIS" PROCESS
20. What has been the Counter Analysis Procedure until now?
• The Counter Analysis Procedure is a confirmatory test subsequent to the A- Sample test;
• The Trainer is informed of the positive result from the A Sample and has 3 working days to either confirm they accept the findings and cancel any further testing or otherwise there is automatically a test of the B-Sample;
• B- Sample testing is thus currently an automatic process unless declined.
21. Who was the Counter Analysis Advisory Committee (CAAC) and what was their role?
• The CAAC was comprised of 6 members with the chairman chosen by the Authority's Board for their standing in a variety of Equine and Scientific Disciplines;
• The CAAC's role was to consider matters relating to analytical data on samples taken from racehorses showing positive indications of Prohibited Substances;
• The CAAC was responsible for being an independent reviewer of the B-Sample testing, and confirming that procedure had been correctly followed.
22. Did the CAAC process the most efficient and current method of secondary confirmatory analysis in comparison with other sports?
• No, following recent reviews of the Authority's testing and medication policies, certain alterations were recommended to the current anti-doping and medication control sampling procedures. The Authority concluded that the Counter Analysis procedure required modernisation in order to make full use of advances in science and laboratory systems whilst offering best value to the sport
23. What are changes in the regulatory and commercial environment will enable the Authority to modernise this process?
• When the CAAC was established there was a significant involvement in the regulation of the sport by the Jockey Club. However, as the regulation of racing is now the hands of an independent authority, it is not necessary to have this wholly independent element to the process of doping and medication control;
• The testing laboratory is a now a separate commercial business and must have in place under its contract with the Authority, internationally recognised and independently audited quality control systems. LGC, (owner of the HFL) under contract to the Government, provides the statutory function of the Laboratory of The Governing Chemist. The statutory duties of the Government Chemist involve "acting as an independent and impartial referee analyst in cases of dispute";
• These commercial and regulatory changes enable the Authority to modernise and simplify its processes by using HFL as the laboratory to fulfill this expectation of robust and reliable drug testing at the Counter Analysis stage.
24. What are the main advantages in using existing internal laboratory rather than an external laboratory at the Counter Analysis stage?
• The main advantages of using HFL at the Counter Analysis stage are as follows;
- HFL is independent from racing and is subject to commercial pressure which ensures robust quality control;
- HFL will reduce the delay and complexity in the chain of custody that occurs with the CAAC procedure;
- The CAAC procedure reduces the integrity of the process as the sample is sent overseas so it leaves the security of the laboratory allowing scope for tampering or interference during transit;
- Eliminating the CAAC procedure will also prevent risk of degradation of the sample;
- Performing the Counter Analysis in the same laboratory as primary analysis ensures greater trust and integrity and reduces the time delay in dealing with medication and doping control breaches for Trainers and Owners.
25. Will there still be the option for the Trainer to request a scientific witness?
• Yes, the role of the scientific witness is an important facility. The Trainer/Owner can request an independent scientific witness as outlined at Section 12
D. LEGAL ISSUES
26. Why do we mean by strict liability when a breach of the Rules occurs?
• In law the term "strict liability" is understood to be liability regardless of intent or negligence.
• In sport, this results in a shifting of the burden of proof to the "subject" and a presumption of negligence of the "subject" based on his/her active duty to avoid breaching the relevant regulations.
Therefore in relation to professional sports, liability must be strict as a "subject" has an active not a passive duty to ensure regulations are adhered to. The Sports professional is responsible for the whole training process including the actions of others.
27. How is the strict liability principle applied in the Rules?
Under the strict liability principle, a breach of the medication or doping Rules occurs whenever a prohibited substance is found to be present within a sample and this can occur with or without intent or negligence on the Trainer's part. This is because under the Rules the Trainer/ Owner is strictly liable for any prohibited substance found in a sample from his/her horse.
It is important to emphasise that this interpretation of strict liability in relation to medication and doping offences is divided into two parts;
i) the phase of analysis (where the sample has been taken and tested);
ii) the phase of sanctioning (Inquiry before the Disciplinary Panel).
Whilst medication or doping violations are based on strict liability – the imposition of a disqualification and penalty are not automatic and will be determined at Inquiry; when a Trainer's explanation for the positive sample will be considered.
28. Is it compulsory to seek legal representation when attending the Inquiry?
No, nor it is compulsory to seek legal representation when attending the Inquiry. Inquiries are held both in absence and in person depending on the factors pertaining to the case. However, in serious cases it is advisable to attend.
In certain circumstances it may be prudent to seek professional advice and/ or legal representation. Should you wish not to attend you also have the option to make any submissions in writing which will be put before the Disciplinary Panel for their consideration.
Please also note that the Chairman of the Disciplinary Panel will ensure that each person subject to an Inquiry is permitted legal representation and oral evidence is only heard in the presence of that person or his representative who shall be given a fair opportunity to question any witness.
29. Who sits on the Disciplinary Panel and how are they chosen?
The Disciplinary Panel and its Terms of Reference appear on the Authority's website, see link attached for more details.
30. What is the main purpose of the Disciplinary Panel?
To hold Disciplinary Inquiries and, where appropriate, to impose penalties as provided for in the Rules, following the provisions set out in Schedule (A) 6.
31. How is a Disciplinary Panel Inquiry conducted?
The Inquiry takes place in private at the Authority's headquarters and as far as practicable in the circumstances of the particular case, according to provisions as set out in the Rules Manual.
32. Can I appeal a decision of the Disciplinary Panel?
Yes, you can appeal a decision to the Appeal Board in accordance with the grounds of appeal as set out in Schedule A(7)section 14 of the Rules.
Please note part 3 of this section (Appeal Board Procedure) and conditions and requirements to lodge an appeal.
|
|
|
